Jump to content

Recommendations Wanted


Jared

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a trip coming up shortly--two weeks in Patagonia including some time in Buenos Aires and Santiago.  Here is what I am planning on bringing from a photography standpoint:

 

* Leica SL

* Spare Battery

* Plenty of SD cards

* Leica T (as a backup and for telephoto use as described below)

* Visoflex for Leica T

* Good quality travel tripod that can handle the weight of the SL

* An empty sandbag that I can use as a weight for the tripod--it gets windy in Patagonia

* M Adapter T

* R Adapter M

* SF 40 flash and one set of spare batteries

* 24-90 Vario SL lens

* 16-21 WATE M lens

* 18-56 Vario TL lens

* 50mm APO Summicron-M lens

* 180mm APO Telyt-R lens

* Lens and camera cleaning supplies

* Chargers for the cameras

* Power outlet adapters

* Hand strap for the SL and neck straps for both cameras

 

Anything else anyone would recommend?  Anything that you wish you had brought on a similar trip but didn't?  Anything I should leave behind because it just wouldn't get any use?  Here is my thinking in general...

 

16-21 will be my primary landscape lens mounted to the SL.  

 

24-90 is, strangely, the one question mark on my list.  While it is a wonderful general purpose lens, I'm not sure I want to lug it around for a day of walking in Santiago or Buenos Aires, and I'm not certain what I will do with it at other times--leave it in a hotel?  I don't expect to need it too much for landscape work, frankly.  I might swap it out of my kit and instead add my 35mm FLE.  Really not sure here and would appreciate advice.

 

For walking around the cities, I was actually thinking of the 50mm for any low light work and the 18-56.  10mp crop mode is probably ample for street shooting, and I actually like how that lens handles on the SL.  I would also have the WATE, of course, for any indoor or architectural shots.

 

At the telephoto end, I really like the 180 Telyt, but that's not a very long lens for wildlife.  My understanding is that, with the exception of birds, 300mm is about ideal for most of the wildlife shots in Patagonia, so I thought I would mount the Telyt on the 'T' instead of the SL.  That gets me 270mm.  I'm leery of the non APO 2x teleconverter R since I have yet to read of anyone who was happy with the results, and the 2x APO teleconverter for this lens is awfully expensive.  Advice on tele use for Patagonia would be much appreciated.

 

I have a backpack I like a lot that I will be stuffing with various lens bags and the like.  It's a small, day-hike bag, but it fits me well, keeps all weight close and tight and will have room enough for food and water as well as the day's photographic equipment. None of the hikes/walks will be too strenuous as I will be traveling with my 79 year old father.  

 

What additional "must have" items would you bring?  What, from my list, would you leave behind?

 

I know topics like this come up often, but I could still appreciate the help since I have never taken a photo specific trip before.  Ever.

 

Thanks - Jared

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pixel density is higher on the T than on the SL, so I will gain a little resolution by using the T with the 180 rather than the SL cropped. Enough to make a difference? Maybe/maybe not. I'll run a couple tests before I go to find out whether there is any visible difference. In any event, both cameras are going since I need a backup in case something goes wrong with the SL.

 

Thanks - Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, after you suggested that I might be just as well served by cropping with the SL vs. using the 'T' as my telephoto solution, I ran a couple simple tests at home.  While I theoretically disagree with you that I won't gain any additional "reach" with the 180 since it's still a 180 (because of the increased pixel density achieved with the APS camera--16 megapixels in the space of 10.3 megapixels), in practice the differences were vanishingly small.  So small, in fact, that minute differences in manual focus were larger than any improvement I could reliably get out of the 'T' for this purpose. I suspect that in practice, since it is a bit easier to focus the SL with its higher resolution viewfinder than the T with the Visoflex, I would do better cropping the SL rather than using the T.  I'll still bring the T along as a backup camera, but I don't think in real world conditions I would be able to achieve any material difference.

 

- Jared

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you subscribe to LuLa (only $12/yr....but now unlimited content access), check out Art Wolfe's Travels to The Edge episode on Patagonia.  He uses Canon gear, but you'll get a good example of a Patagonian photo journey (albeit with crew behind the scenes to provide assistance....another video on that).....in any event, a beautiful place.  

 

Lenses are of course personal, depending on your subject matter and shooting preferences.  Less is sometimes more for travel, unless you have specialty needs like bird shooting.

 

You didn't mention laptop or hard drive storage....not mandatory if you trust SD cards until you get home.

 

Jeff

 

edit....We posted simultaneously.

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a trip coming up shortly--two weeks in Patagonia including some time in Buenos Aires and Santiago.  Here is what I am planning on bringing from a photography standpoint:

 

* Leica SL

* Spare Battery

* Plenty of SD cards

* Leica T (as a backup and for telephoto use as described below)

* Visoflex for Leica T

* Good quality travel tripod that can handle the weight of the SL

* An empty sandbag that I can use as a weight for the tripod--it gets windy in Patagonia

* M Adapter T

* R Adapter M

* SF 40 flash and one set of spare batteries

* 24-90 Vario SL lens

* 16-21 WATE M lens

* 18-56 Vario TL lens

* 50mm APO Summicron-M lens

* 180mm APO Telyt-R lens

* Lens and camera cleaning supplies

* Chargers for the cameras

* Power outlet adapters

* Hand strap for the SL and neck straps for both cameras

 

Kicthen sink might not go amiss. That way if your subject doesn't stand still you could throw it at them.   :D

Edited by Rapierwitman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks much for the recommendation.  I'll definitely take a look.  I certainly understand the "less is more" mantra--more and more I'm leaning towards leaving the 24-90 behind.  Good as it is, it's not really a travel lens.  I also understand that everyone's lens decisions are personal.  Lots of people, for example, would choose a 28mm lens as the best single focal length for a travel camera.  That's why Leica made the 'Q' with a 28mm.  Me, I absolutely can't stand that focal length.  I just don't "see" images that way.  I have owned a 28mm Elmarit for years for use with my M, and I don't think I have ever once taken a picture I liked with that lens.  Nothing to do with the optics--it's absolutely superb.  It's me.  I can't compose a picture well at the focal length.  35mm, I'm good.  50mm I'm better.  Wider lenses like 24mm or 21mm I do fine.  But 28 I just can't handle for some reason.  

 

I will be bringing a 12" Macbook on the trip so I won't be relying purely on the SD cards for storage.

 

Thanks - Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like a lot, Jared.

 

Thinking back to previous trips in Nepal and China (not that different?), I've tended to use a wide, a mid-range zoom and a telephoto. 180mm is my preferred tele, and a sensible limit for handholding. I do like the 28mm focal length, so that's what I'd take. 21 is a good alternative (big skies).

 

If it were me, I'd take the SL & 24-90 zoom (they're weather proof and give AF - if I wasn't taking the zoom, I'd leave the SL behind and take an M instead).

 

Similarly, a little bean bag can suffice instead of a tripod - with the iPhone App, the camera doesn't need to be at eye level.

 

You don't mention filters ...

 

Patagonia is a life time trip (I would like to go). With my gear, I'd take:

 

SL & zoom, batteries etc

180mm APO-Elmarit and adapters

21 Summilux-M

Polarising filter

Tripod (maybe)

 

Optional:

Monochrom

28 & 50 Summiluxes

APO-Extender 2x

Macro-M adapter

 

The test would be - which bag am I taking and how much can I reasonably fit into it? In a place like Patagonia, if you can't keep it with you all the time, and use it, don't bother taking it ...

 

In my travels, a compact messenger type bag has been the most convenient, and a backpack the most comfortable. Take as little as you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was you I'd bring one camera only. In this case, the SL. Plus spare battery, tripod, flash and 3 lenses:

16-21 Wate

50mm Cron

180mm Telyt-R

 

But if you ask me what I would do if I was me (instead of being you) I'd bring one Leica M9 w/ a 35 cron asph, one spare battery and one SB-30 flash. Done.

 

Safe travels!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I can risk keeping it down to one camera. There aren't any Leica shops within 1500 km. If drop and break something, I'm basically giving up the photo trip of a lifetime. The T body is pretty small, though, And I tested to make sure it all fits in my backpack--it does. It's pushing 20 pounds, though. I think I need to shrink it a little.

 

I suppose I could dump the 24-90 and just bring the 50 instead. The WATE would cover wide angle and interiors, the 180 telephoto, and the 50 as my city lens. Maybe the 35 FLE instead? Either one, I suppose. I'll try packing it up different ways and see.

 

I'd like to get the backpack down under 15 pounds with a water bottle and everything "expensive" that I won't want to leave in a hotel.

 

- Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

All right, I packed it all up in the backpack to see where I am and I made a few strategic reductions in gear...

 

I won't bring the 24-90.  I won't bring the flash.  I won't bring the Visoflex since the T is really for emergencies only.  I won't bring the 18-56.  If I don't include the chargers when I'm out for the day (since they should be safe to leave in the hotel) that's just under 15 pounds for the pack with all expensive equipment including the laptop and tripod.  That excludes food and water for day hikes.  I think that's workable if not optimal.  I'll think about leaving the computer behind as well since that is about two pounds worth of the above and is relatively fragile as well.

 

- Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt there's any real need for a backup camera. For me, that would mean having a second SL. 

 

Too much in the original post's equipment list for me. 

 

SL + 24, 50, 90, 180 or SL + 15, 24-90, 180 would do it fine for me. All of that fits nicely in the Billingham 225, along all all the other minor stuff I'd want to carry. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just back from a week in Chile (Santiago and San Pedro de Atacama).  Photography was not the main point of the trip, but I packed a Think Tank Urban Disguise 60 with:

 

SL[601] and M[240] and MacBookPro 15"

chargers for all three, cords, spare M battery, adapter plugs (two pin sockets in Chile, don't know for Argentina)

SX-R 80

APO 180-R/4.0 plus APO 2x extender

Super-Elmarit-R 15 

and SX-M 28 (on the M[240] at all times)

Sirui carbon-fibre monopod, Manfrotto table-top and M-T, Leica R-M and Novoflex R-M adapters

 

This came to 12 kg.

 

I've posted some selects (at getdpi.com/forum/leica ) and will post a pointer to Flickr albums when I'm done.  But this was slightly more than I needed.  The most accessible wildlife I encountered were pelicans (penguins in the south are similarly un-timid), and the 180 with some cropping was adequate.  I intended to use the 15 in the salt flats, but didn't find the occasion.

 

scott

 

link to some M240 shots: http://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/27485-fun-w-digital-m-images.html#post679718

link to SL shots both in Santiago and in the north are easy to find in the "fun with SL" thread

Edited by scott kirkpatrick
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the helpful advice so far. It's going to be the SL not the M because I expect to use the WATE and the 180 pretty heavily, and neither of those is well suited to the M. The one real surprise was how many of you said to skip the backup camera. I just can't bring myself to leave the T behind, but I am skipping any lenses for it so I'm not adding much weight or bulk. I've got adapters for both Chile and Argentina--apparently Argentina uses both 2 pin and an angled 3 pin.

 

I understand the temptation to bring just the M and a 35 that a couple of you mentioned, and if I were going just to the cities I would be tempted. But that just doesn't feel right for national parks, wildlife, glaciers, etc..

 

Appreciate the advice, even if I don't intend to follow all of it.

 

- Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pity you don't have the T 11-23 and 55-135 ..... they are actually very fine lenses and work well on the T.

 

Then you could take the SL, 24-90 and leave the T 18-56 which is a bit redundant.

 

That reduces the amount of clobber to a minimum and covers 16-200mm with 3 lenses, not a lot of weight, 2 bodies and a lot of flexibility ....

 

What you are suggesting is a rather mixed bag of odds and ends .... and don't forget the T native resolution is almost on par with the original M9 and it's a very good camera in its own right ..... and very undeservedly maligned by many ....

Edited by thighslapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...